Put your money where your mouth is...

[vc1111]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,154805,00.html

NEW YORK "” As President George W. Bush"™s 60-day Social Security (search) tour comes to an end, the latest FOX News poll finds that a large minority of the public is unclear on the voluntary nature of his personal investment proposal. In addition, the poll shows most Americans favor giving individuals the "right to choose" between keeping their Social Security contributions in the current system and putting a portion in an investment account, and just over half say they personally would want the choice to invest some of their contributions.

Though President Bush has talked about voluntary accounts, the new poll finds that while 57 percent of Americans understand the accounts would be voluntary, 27 percent believe they would be mandatory, and the remaining 17 percent are unsure.

Overall, fully 79 percent of the public think people under age 55 should have the right to choose between keeping all of their Social Security contributions in the current system and investing a portion of their funds. That support goes up to 84 percent among respondents under age 55.

On the personal level, 53 percent say they want the choice to invest a portion of their contributions, up from 48 percent in early February "” soon after President Bush spoke in his State of the Union address about offering investment accounts. Among those under age 55, almost two-thirds (64 percent) want the option to invest.

More generally, when Social Security is not mentioned, most Americans say they trust themselves (77 percent) over the government (15 percent) when it comes to making retirement investment decisions.

Opinion Dynamics Corporation conducted the national telephone poll of 900 registered voters for FOX News on April 25-26.

The game continues...

I wonder if, given this opportunity to control their accounts, the general public will follow its usual pattern of basically investing consistently when the market is high or rising, and withdrawing or slowing the rate of investment when the market is low or in disarray....

[tardfarmer]

I wonder if, given this opportunity to control their accounts, the general public will follow its usual pattern of basically investing consistently when the market is high or rising, and withdrawing or slowing the rate of investment when the market is low or in disarray....

This is where the concept of personal responsibility and liberty come into play. Funny how people want to tell me what to do with my money stolen from my paycheck for one of the greatest ponzi schemes in this countries history.

Why don't we pass laws telling people what to do with the rest of their money. We could break it down very easily in order to prevent frivolous spending -- in essence, saving people from their own stupidity:

- 48.6% of wages must go toward housing
- 20% must go toward food and clothing
- the rest must be given to the fed in order to p*ss it away and lose it.

Same logic.

[Aught Six]

Though President Bush has talked about voluntary accounts, the new poll finds that while 57 percent of Americans understand the accounts would be voluntary, 27 percent believe they would be mandatory, and the remaining 17 percent are unsure.

I don't believe in holding the rest of us up simply because morons are having difficulties keeping pace.

I don't care about social security--it's entitlement. I don't care if it's solvent or not. I want my money in my personal investment account. The feds have plenty of other opportunities to play nanny without this one.

More generally, when Social Security is not mentioned, most Americans say they trust themselves (77 percent) over the government (15 percent) when it comes to making retirement investment decisions.

Uh, yeah....

The game continues...

I wonder if, given this opportunity to control their accounts, the general public will follow its usual pattern of basically investing consistently when the market is high or rising, and withdrawing or slowing the rate of investment when the market is low or in disarray....

Probably, but hey, that's the market.

[vc1111]

Probably, but hey, that's the market.

Actually its individuals rather consistently failing to understand the market and the fundamentals of investing.

I support the idea of individual accounts if only for the fact that the funds can at least to some degree, be removed from the miserable slush fund that is social security in 2005. Still I feel that many will fail to stay the course through thick and thin and as a result may have less than if they'd done nothing but maintain the present broken down plan.

[Aught Six]

Actually its individuals rather consistently failing to understand the market and the fundamentals of investing.

Then that could potentially open out more opportunities for us interested in the long haul.

Still I feel that many will fail to stay the course through thick and thin and as a result may have less than if they'd done nothing but maintain the present broken down plan.

Personal account; personal problem.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted by Admins]

[Aught Six]

Allowing limited use of a 4% personal account is the first step towards total dismantling of SS. Think big.

[vc1111]

You are right, Ifferd. I meant that the funds would be segregated from the general fund and, as I understand it, could be transferred upon death to others...but I'm recalling that from memory and I've read a mountain of stuff in the last 6 weeks so I'm a bit fuzzy on that caveat.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted by Admins]

[Double Creek]

The most important part to me is that upon my death, MY MONEY can be transferred to MY FAMILY and not some pot smoking yuppy who never paid in a dime.